Hansard

I offer the apologies of my colleague Brian Monteith, who is not able to be with us for the whole of this afternoon's debate. Unfortunately he is attending a family funeral, but he hopes to be with us later if time allows.

As deputy education spokesman for the Conservatives, I am pleased to contribute to the debate on the bill to create a children's commissioner. I do not deny that my party's approach has been rather sceptical from the outset, as members of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee will be aware. I do not apologise for that; indeed I sometimes wish that there were more scepticism about legislation.

It is to be regretted that so many people—especially some of those elected to the Parliament—believe that the Parliament's success should be measured by the quantity of legislation rather than by its quality. To borrow a phrase from manufacturing, it is not the productivity that matters but the build quality. Lawmaking is a serious business, and it is important that we examine whether other approaches might be used before we commit ourselves to legislation.

It is crucial that an initially attractive idea about the need for a children's commissioner was challenged and justification sought. I believe that the Education, Culture and Sport Committee understood its role in that regard and that it has made a case for a children's commissioner that we will support. It is our belief that the evidence that was presented justified the introduction of the committee bill and I congratulate the convener on her introductory remarks.

Evidence from witnesses who are active in the field of child law, protection and care have made a compelling case, especially for giving looked-after children a voice. During the evidence sessions, my colleague Brian Monteith said that a commissioner should be able to walk before he or she can run, and I am glad that the committee has resisted calls to give the commissioner even greater powers than are provided for in the bill.

Account has been taken of a number of our concerns, such as the possible threat of family and parental rights and responsibilities being challenged. The possibility of the commissioner taking up individual cases has been reined back and the suggestion that the commissioner would represent the views of Scotland's youth has, quite properly, been disposed of.

Let us have a commissioner who can consider how we can better protect children and how the public services that seek to protect them can be more attentive to their needs than to those of the producers. Let the commissioner report to the Parliament so that we can debate what further measures, if any, must be taken to right wrongs and to relieve injustices. Once the commissioner has had time to bed down and to show what can be done and what might be a weakness in how he or she operates, the Parliament can reconsider—in 10 or more years' time—whether fine tuning or new legislation is needed.

The Conservatives are willing adherents to the bill and we will give it our support in the vote later this afternoon.